rb and tag your favorite song that's not in english, japanese or korean
Does music from soundtracks count? If so, there's the Greek "With It, or On It (ḠtÄĚn ḠepĂŹ tâs)" from the Titan Quest II soundtrack.
AnasAbdin
I'd rather be in outer space đ¸


shark vs the universe
Lint Roller? I Barely Know Her

Acquired Stardust

izzy's playlists!
styofa doing anything

@theartofmadeline
YOU ARE THE REASON
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me

Kaledo Art
cherry valley forever

Love Begins
todays bird

oozey mess
hello vonnie
Misplaced Lens Cap
seen from United States

seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia

seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Peru
seen from Australia
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
@lananiscorner
rb and tag your favorite song that's not in english, japanese or korean
Does music from soundtracks count? If so, there's the Greek "With It, or On It (ḠtÄĚn ḠepĂŹ tâs)" from the Titan Quest II soundtrack.

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
rip king, truly nobody was doing it for weird sci-fi and fantasy obsessed nerds like you đ
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0p0rz4n0mo
I laughed so fucking hard at this
Shout out to the (many) times I got called an elitist gatekeeper for saying that the only real way to fully understand a work of fiction is to experience it firsthand and that summaries and reviews are not a replacement for that
Me, reading the first 80% of the post: What do you mean, "experience it firsthand"? How am I supposed to join the Hunger Games or go the Odyssey?
Me, reading the final clause of the post: Oh, you literally meant that people have to read the book/listen to the audiobook in order to fully understand it. And people got mad. Oh dear.
And this doesn't mean you need to read / watch / listen to absolutely everything! (not that that's remotely possible)
It's perfectly reasonable that I have decided, based on ambient cultural information, that Ready Player One will not be my jam and I'm not going to read it. What that means, though, is that I have very little information about Ready Player One. I am not an authority on Ready Player One. If there's a discussion of the character development or worldbuilding or plot structure in Ready Player One, I can listen, but I can't really contribute, because I have not read it and thus am missing quite a lot of information about it.
There are more things in the world that I am not an authority on than there are things that I am an authority on, and that's okay! I should just be honest with myself and others about it.
This. I will make a caveat here--and this is not to object to what OP was saying, but to contextualize a bit: if the work in question exists in multiple media and you have only consumed one specific iteration of it, then you can only claim to understand that version of it.
E.g. the example from fidgetyhands, Ready Player One: If you have only watched the movie, then be aware that this is only one of two versions of the story, only one of two versions of these characters. If you wander into a discussion of book!RPO or its characters, you are not on your home turf--you are a guest in someone else's yard, and you should behave accordingly. Of course, that doesn't give book!RPO fans the right to harass you (stay civil, folks!), but if they tell you that "no, character X didn't do Y" or "that's not how it happened though--that was only a movie edit", the adequate response from your side is "oh, guess that was only in the movie--my bad" and then you back off.
Springing off of my addiction post once more, I am also skeptical at best of 12-step programs, because their framework has just never remotely aligned with my actual experience.
The substance I was addicted to was heroin. While I was actively addicted, it absolutely came before everything else. My life shrank around it. I kept using despite very real, very obvious negative consequences. If youâre looking for something that fits the âcompulsion + harm + loss of controlâ model, that was it.
But whatâs always sat strangely with me is what happened when that context changed.
Once my abusive relationship ended and I was no longer in an environment where it was readily available, it was shockingly easy to stop. Iâm not saying it was physically comfortable. My body was pretty pissed off for a while. But psychologically, it just didnât have the same hold anymore. I wasnât spending my days white-knuckling cravings or constantly thinking about it. It dropped out of my life in a way that, according to the 12-step model, is not really supposed to happen.
And thatâs where my issue with that framework starts.
Because 12-step ideology tends to assume that if you have ever had that kind of relationship with one substance, it reveals something fundamental and permanent about you. That you now have a generalized âaddictive natureâ that will attach itself to other substances or behaviors if youâre not constantly managing it. That you are, in some essential way, always on the verge of transferring that pattern onto something else.
And that just hasnât been true for me.
I was a near-daily cannabis user for years. When it started consistently making me feel physically uncomfortable instead of good, I stopped. No drawn-out battle, no existential crisis, just âthis isnât giving me what I liked about it anymoreâ and I moved on.
I drink occasionally, in social or celebratory contexts, and I genuinely find alcohol kind of boring outside of that. It doesnât have much pull for me.
I tried gambling once, got annoyed at how tedious and overstimulating it felt, and left the casino in under an hour. I have not felt remotely compelled to revisit that experience.
I use the internet a lot, and I play a handful of video games, but I can also go on a camping trip with no signal and be completely fine, unless you want to try and find something pathological about nature photography, in which case you can blow it out your ass. If anything, I generally enjoy the change of pace. Thereâs no sense of panic or withdrawal or âI need to get back to my computer/consoles immediately.â
So when I hear the idea that addiction is this broad, transferable trait that will latch onto anything with quick reward or low friction, I just donât see it reflected in my own life.
What does make sense, looking back, is context.
When I was using heroin, I was in an abusive relationship. My environment was unstable, stressful, and honestly pretty bleak. The substance didnât just exist in a vacuum. It fit into a specific set of conditions where it functioned as relief, escape, and regulation.
When those conditions changed, the behavior changed with them.
That doesnât mean there was no dependency. There obviously was. It doesnât mean there were no consequences. There very much were. My grades suffered. I dropped out of college. I lost my apartment because staying out of withdrawal and numbing out from the abuse felt more important than paying rent.
But it does suggest that what we call âaddictionâ might not always be this permanent, identity-level trait that needs to be managed forever. Sometimes it looks a lot more like a relationship between a person, a substance, and a specific environment.
When thatâs the case, then a framework that assumes universality - âif this happened once, it will always be waiting to happen again, with anythingâ - is going to miss a lot of variation.
Iâm not saying 12-step programs canât help people. Clearly they can, or they likely wouldnât exist in the way they do. But I do think theyâre often treated as the model of addiction rather than a model that fits some people and not others, and when your experience doesnât match that model, many people who swear by them will assume that you are misunderstanding yourself, in denial, or ânot taking it seriously enough.â This paternalistic attitude only serves to make me even more skeptical of the framework.
For me, what mattered wasnât declaring myself permanently âaddictiveâ or treating every pleasurable behavior as a potential threat.
What mattered was getting out of the environment where that pattern made sense in the first place.
Rat Park, people. Stop forgetting about Rat Park.
âaddictionâ might not always be this permanent, identity-level trait... Sometimes it looks a lot more like a relationship between a person, a substance, and a specific environment.
I have helped change more individual behavior by changing the environment around them than I have by working on their behavior.
It's honestly shocking that looking at what circumstances in the environment lead to the start of addictive behavior is not the very first step taken during treatment. Every person who has ever worked in trauma response (whether physical or psychological) knows that it's highly ineffective to start treatment before removing the person from the traumatic environement.
If a burn victim is still in a burning building, you get them out of the damn building before you work on those burns.
If somebody just saw another person murdered in front of them, you get them away from the crime scene before you start counselling.
If somebody just barely survived a storm/flood that left them homeless, no amount of therapy is going to help much until they've got stable food and shelter.
You would think this is common sense, but apparently not.
(Also, this does remind me of that one post where OP talked to their doctor about all the symptoms they were experiencing due to work stress, and after the doctor suggested treatments to get rid of the symptoms temporarily while putting OP on sick leave, OP told their doctor "well after I'm done with these pills I'll still need to take those meetings and work those overtime hours or I'll get fired", which was the point at which their doctor realized "this job is killing you then, no joke, please quit and find something else".)

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
Also applies to "AI" "artists" and "musicians."
how do you pronounce the honourific "Ms." in english
"miss"
"miz"
other
unsure/see results
really good "shocking number of people are confidently objectively demonstrably completely wrong" poll
i am losing my fucking mind
#we dont use honorifics in my first language so whenever i have to select options (usually for flights) im always so confused#like what is actually the difference between miss and ms#i like miss bc it sounds more historical and im a historian so
"Miss" means an unmarried woman. "Mrs." means a married woman. (both of these have origins in the word "mistress" as in "mistress of the house".)
"Ms." - prounounced MIZ, btw - is a third option popularized by gloria steinem in the 70s - mainly through her feminist magazine Ms. - which is meant to be a neutral term, usable for any and all women regardless of marital status (hence the soul destroying irony of the tags above). it gained wider general acceptance when geraldine ferraro, the first woman to be nominated as VP on a national major party ticket, started using it widely to avoid confusion, since she was married but used her maiden name professionally. eventually over the years it came into common use though i do think the brits are a little more critical of it than americans (as far as i'm aware lol)
Gentiles/non-Jews of Tumblr, how well did you do in the quiz on Judaism 101 linked below?
0
1-4
5-9
10-14
15-20
21-25
26-31
32 :)
Iâm Jewish/show results
This is the quiz and I did not come up with it, credit goes to @iswearbyalltheflowers on this post.
Absolutely no judgment, Iâm genuinely really curious and I figured more people would answer anonymously here than on the original post.
I am tired of this! Or am I just tired?
Recently someone on the Skyrim Reddit asked what one (1) power/mechanic people would bring into the real world if they had to choose. The winner was the Well-Rested bonus, which you get in-game for sleeping 2 hours in any bed you own. If only...

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
do you actually like being alone or did you just get used to no one ever showing up for you
ouch
I think I probably learned to like being alone for sad reasons (chronic illness, difficult childhood homelife, etc), but what I learned was that my own company was generally sufficient - I figured out how to fill my time with things I enjoyed doing and enough thoughts I enjoyed thinking to balance out thoughts I suffered to think, and actually I do think these skills still served me once I was no longer alone because they allowed me not to cling desperately to people in fear that they might disappear. This made relationships with kind people healthier and relationships with unkind people easier to end. It also gave me some control. It meant that I always knew Iâd be ok if a relationship (romantic or platonic) ended or was permanently altered, even if the transition involved pain, because I liked hanging out with myself. Once Iâd really internalized that it freed me from relationships with people who did not treat me well, because it allowed me to set boundaries and remove myself (to my own company) when the company was no longer good. It made it a lot easier to recognize when certain company might be good or not worth pursuing.
Truly recommend learning to love being alone without rejecting the chance of connection with other people. In this way you can avoid the kind of hobbyless behavior that ends up truly isolating people who cannot learn to sit with themselves.
And yeah, sometimes learning to enjoy spending time with yourself means you have to change. Maybe you donât like hanging with yourself because youâre mean when youâre alone, or because youâre insufficiently entertaining (having been trained, or having trained yourself) to wait for others to entertain. If youâre not exercising the qualities you would seek in a friend when youâre the only person in a room, keeping your own company will feel like a trap. Be the kind of friend youâd want to have (even to yourself). Donât be an asshole any time the room empties (everybody hates me, Iâm worthless, etc) and donât bore yourself. Find things to be interested in and curious about and imaginative around. If you flop inertly every time youâre by yourself of course youâre not going to want to spend time with you. Take yourself out. Tell yourself better stories.
USAmericans and Canadians: can you confidently draw your state/province flag from memory?
USAmericans and Canadians: can you confidently draw your state/province flag from memory?
Yes
No
See results
Neither American nor Canadian, but if you are, and you don't know what your state flag is, here's a delightful analysis of all of them from a vexilological perspective by CGP Grey:
US states flags (slightly outdated, because Minnesota got a new one, and that video is unfortunately paywalled)
Canada states flags
Tumblr is super big on the "I didn't say it was good, I said I liked it" but really need to discover the value in its opposite of "I didn't say it was bad, I said I hated it".
You can acknowledge that something is good, great, a masterpiece even, and just straight-up not enjoy it.
Reblog and put in the tags: In terms of controversy, discourse, infighting, ship wars, etc., which of the fandomâs youâve been was the most stressful? Which was the most peaceful?
sometimes you have to take a long hard look in the mirror and say. okay buddy. you stayed up until 2am stressing about shit. you had a nightmare last night. youâre exhausted. donât expect anything special from yourself today and donât handle any dangerous goods. sparkle on

Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch ⢠No registration required ⢠HD streaming
This is a literal "Hammerhead" shark created by artist Matt Sanders.
The sculpture is made from 685 reclaimed steel hammer heads and weighs 500 lbs (about 227 kg). It took approximately 2,500 hours of work to weld together. Sanders even used sledgehammers for the eye sockets and ball-peen hammers for the eyes to give it a realistic look.
It was displayed at the Aquarium of the Pacific in California and remains one of the coolest examples of upcycled art out there.
why bother caring about the environment when 1. Itâs so obviously a lost cause and 2. Thereâs definitely going to be a nuclear war?
And what are you doing about it Anon? Learn about ecological restoration or get out of my way.
If you read ecology books printed in the 70s and 80s, they were absolutely convinced that whales and tigers would not survive the century. There's a whole plot in Star Trek about how whales are extinct actually. Here in Argentina, we were sure that yaguaretĂŠs would have gone extinct. It was thought that rainforests would be forever lost, because there was no way that such complex ecosystems would be restored.
Now, you can go to PenĂnsula ValdĂŠs and find that the whale population there is growing year after year, people can see them from their windows. In IberĂĄ, where yaguaretĂŠs were extinct for over 70 years, there's now a population of 35 and growing, after being reintroduced just five years ago. As for rainforests?
We've becoming very, very good on restoring them. Natural environments, when given space and time to heal, can return to that they were. And after all, all natural enviroments are managed by human societies. It is up to us to implement a good management, un buen gobierno.
I firmly believe our children and grandchildren will see a restoration of Earth like never before.
Millions of people are working on this. You can learn about it, perhaps even become one of them. Or be a pointless doomer in my ask box. Your choice.
if there are people who care, it's never a lost cause. at one point, kÄkÄpĹ, a nocturnal flightless parrot species from aotearoa, were thought to be entirely extinct for decades. until 1977, where booming calls from males were heard on the small island of whenua hou. now, thanks to people who care so much they dedicated their lives to caring, kÄkÄpĹ numbers are close to 300. despite the setbacks. despite the small gene pool causing infertility and health problems. people cared so fucking much that they survived. this is one of COUNTLESS, countless similar stories. I'm studying ecology so that I can go into conservation and all around me, every day, I see people who care enough to put years of their lives into learning about and solving environmental problems. I don't know man. hope isn't just some nebulous thing. it's tangible if you do something with it.
Tim Wong saw the decline of the pipeline swallowtail butterfly, and dedicated himself to providing habitat and raising babies, and it worked.
Spix's Macaws were extinct in the wild for 70 years, and now captive breeding and conservation groups have reintroduced a small population (with more on the way) and there are babies being successfully raised in the wild again.
And what else is there, but hope? We exist for the grace of hope. Those who have lost all hope don't stay here. If you are here to send an ask like this, it is not because you have given up, it's that you are hoping someone will show you that that hope is worth having.
It is!! It always is!!
There will be good things and if you cannot find them, make them! The time will pass anyway, you can choose what to do with it, and so many, many people are choosing to try to help.
The Lord Howe Island rodent eradication project never fails to make me cry, itâs so beautiful.
The population of an entire island working together to eradicate every last rat and mouse to save the native bird populations. They had to trap a bunch of the birds and keep them in captivity so they wouldnât be hurt by the rodenticides, and released them after the rodents were gone. Normal residents helped by phoning in tips whenever they saw rodents. And they did it. Lord Howe Island, last I read, remains rodent free, and the native bird populations are rebounding!
Acid rain and the hole in the ozone layer, both of which were terrifying specters of my childhood, have been largely dealt with. Ecosystems devastated by acid rain are also recovering.
We are making a difference!
In 1979, an audacious, expensive conservation project was begun to try and breed california condors in captivity toward being released into the wild again. This was considered useless and hopeless by many people, but many more people said we had to at least TRY.
In 1991, the first captive-raised condors were re-introduced to Big Sur, Pinnacles, and Bitter Creek.
In 2006, three months before I turned eighteen, the first wild pair of condors was seen nesting in Big Sur in over a hundred years. A hundred years.
We did that. We fixed it.
How about another example.
When my mom was small, in the 1960s, there were many, many days of the year she was not allowed outside. Days and days they had recess indoors, because the air was so poisonous to breathe. Here's an article about it, with some good pictures.
My mom was 13 in the picture on the left. She was 50 in the picture on the right.
In 1987, there were 27 California Condors in the world, all captive.
In 2024, there were 566.
369 of them fly free.
That happened within my lifetime, and I'm not even 40 yet.
When you lose hope, think of our stories we're telling you. Recount them to yourself like a prayer. That's what I do.
There are 369 California Condors flying free in the sky right now.
There is no more acid rain.
There is an ozone.
There are wild tigers.
There are still birds on Lord Howe Island.
There are 369 California Condors flying free.
I was born in the late 80s. One of the first books I ever read was about different breeds of horses (because what little girl doesn't love horses?) and this was so early in my life that I don't remember anything else about that book other than one fact that made little preschool me immeasurably sad: the Przewalskiâs horse had recently gone extinct. I remember asking my mom what "extinct" meant and I was so very very sad to think that this beautiful horse (the book was full of pictures of course--it was for little kids) had been around for a hundred thousand years, but then thanks to less than a hundred years of us stupid humans being amazingly stupid there were no more horses like that. Those poor horses! What kind of idiots are we?
And tbh, the Przewalskiâs horse wasn't the only animal like that in my books. Tigers were going extinct. Humpback whales were going extinct. I remember reading about these animals and being so angry at the people who came before me for having driven these animals to extinction by destroying their habitats or just flat out over-hunting them.
But you know what? Humpback whales are still around and recovering. Tigers are still around. There are now around 2500 Przewalskiâs horses in the world.
And this didn't happen because of some magical hand wave from god--it happened because for every idiot who wants to see the world burn, there's also usually at least one person who wants to save it, and when people like that band together and support each other and their shared cause, they can make a difference.
Also, yes to everything said in previous reblogs about the ozone layer and acid rain. Every geography textbook in the 90s talked in detail about those, because they were very real threats, but have you heard anything about them recently? No. Because we actually managed to fix them.
A better world is possible. Never give up.